Reproductive outcomes following a cancer diagnosis in female cancer survivors

Background: There has been an increase in survivorship as treatment for cancer continues to improve. The effects of a cancer diagnosis can cause complications during both pregnancy and birth, which can heighten risks for both mother and baby, after cancer. A major gap in the knowledge is the lack of evidence-based data on adverse obstetric and birth outcomes experienced by female survivors who become pregnant and give birth after a diagnosis of cancer. Objective: The primary objective was to explore pregnancy and birth risks and complications following a first cancer diagnosis and compare outcomes to a matched comparison group of women without cancer. Secondary objectives were to explore overall survival following a birth after a first cancer diagnosis compared to women without cancer (matched comparison group), as well as time to delivery after a first cancer diagnosis (study group 2). Methods: The study used a retrospective nested-cohort study design. Women identified with a first cancer diagnosis from January 1, 1994 and December 31, 2001 were included. Up to two women from the comparison group were matched with women with cancer. All women gave birth from January 1, 1994 and December 31, 2013. The study included (i) women with a previous cancer diagnosis who were pregnant or gave birth within one year of a cancer diagnosis (≤365 days) (study group 1); (ii) women with a previous cancer diagnosis who gave birth one year after a cancer diagnosis date (>365 days) (study group 2); and (iii) women without cancer who gave birth (matched comparison group in study group 3). Conclusion: Findings indicate the importance of providing a timely referral for cancer patients to consult with a reproductive specialist regarding the adverse late effects of cancer on a woman’s reproductive function, both prior to starting gonadotoxic treatment and in the survivorship period. Discussions should include potential risks and complications of a cancer diagnosis on pregnancy and birth in the survivorship period, for mother and baby. Furthermore, survivors who become pregnant after cancer require routine surveillance by a multidisciplinary team of health care professionals to reduce pregnancy and delivery complications

A Study Protocol for Safeguards Child and Adolescent Mental Health Rapid Response Teams (‘;Safeguards Teams’) Service

Introduction: As the number of children and young people (CYP) presenting to Emergency Departments (ED) with acute mental health (MH) presentations has been steadily increasing over the years and further accelerated by the pandemic, there is an urgent need to develop and evaluate innovative solutions to respond to this growing challenge. Description: The evaluation of the Safeguards Teams Program (STP) aims to ascertain the impact, implementation and economic analysis of this acute rapid response recovery-focused, trauma-informed assessment and brief intervention for CYP (aged 0–17 years) presenting in acute MH crisis and their families/caregivers. The STP will support consumers (patients) and their families/caregivers to navigate the complex and often fragmented child and adolescent MH services (CAMHS) landscape, thereby avoiding unnecessary ED presentations or hospitalisations, and facilitating comprehensive assessment and appropriate care pathways for those who present in crisis. Discussion: The STP is expected to provide CYP in MH crisis and their support networks with early access to evidence-based specialist care at the right place and time. Conclusion: Implementation of the STP will assist with identifying and addressing gaps in acute care for CYP and provide the necessary evidence for service redesign in collaboration with consumers, service providers and other stakeholders

The development of an international oncofertility competency framework: a model to increase oncofertility implementation

© AlphaMed Press 2019 Background: Despite international evidence about fertility preservation (FP), several barriers still prevent the implementation of equitable FP practice. Currently, oncofertility competencies do not exist. The aim of this study was to develop an oncofertility competency framework that defines the key components of oncofertility care, develops a model for prioritizing service development, and defines the roles that health care professionals (HCPs) play. Materials and Method: A quantitative modified Delphi methodology was used to conduct two rounds of an electronic survey, querying and synthesizing opinions about statements regarding oncofertility care with HCPs and patient and family advocacy groups (PFAs) from 16 countries (12 high and 4 middle income). Statements included the roles of HCPs and priorities for service development care across ten domains (communication, oncofertility decision aids, age-appropriate care, referral pathways, documentation, oncofertility training, reproductive survivorship care and fertility-related psychosocial support, supportive care, and ethical frameworks) that represent 33 different elements of care. Results: The first questionnaire was completed by 457 participants (332 HCPs and 125 PFAs). One hundred and thirty-eight participants completed the second questionnaire (122 HCPs and 16 PFAs). Consensus was agreed on 108 oncofertility competencies and the roles HCPs should play in oncofertility care. A three-tier service development model is proposed, with gradual implementation of different components of care. A total of 92.8% of the 108 agreed competencies also had agreement between high and middle income participants. Conclusion: FP guidelines establish best practice but do not consider the skills and requirements to implement these guidelines. The competency framework gives HCPs and services a structure for the training of HCPs and implementation of care, as well as defining a model for prioritizing oncofertility service development. Implications for Practice: Despite international evidence about fertility preservation (FP), several barriers still prevent the implementation of equitable FP practice. The competency framework gives 108 competencies that will allow health care professionals (HCPs) and services a structure for the development of oncofertility care, as well as define the role HCPs play to provide care and support. The framework also proposes a three-tier oncofertility service development model which prioritizes the development of components of oncofertility care into essential, enhanced, and expert services, giving clear recommendations for service development. The competency framework will enhance the implementation of FP guidelines, improving the equitable access to medical and psychological oncofertility care

How Can We Improve Oncofertility Care for Patients? A Systematic Scoping Review of Current International Practice and Models of Care

© The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. BACKGROUND: Fertility preservation (FP) is an important quality of life issue for cancer survivors of reproductive age. Despite the existence of broad international guidelines, the delivery of oncofertility care, particularly amongst paediatric, adolescent and young adult patients, remains a challenge for healthcare professionals (HCPs). The quality of oncofertility care is variable and the uptake and utilization of FP remains low. Available guidelines fall short in providing adequate detail on how oncofertility models of care (MOC) allow for the real-world application of guidelines by HCPs. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE: The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature on the components of oncofertility care as defined by patient and clinician representatives, and identify the barriers, facilitators and challenges, so as to improve the implementation of oncofertility services. SEARCH METHODS: A systematic scoping review was conducted on oncofertility MOC literature published in English between 2007 and 2016, relating to 10 domains of care identified through consumer research: communication, oncofertility decision aids, age-appropriate care, referral pathways, documentation, training, supportive care during treatment, reproductive care after cancer treatment, psychosocial support and ethical practice of oncofertility care. A wide range of electronic databases (CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, AEIPT, Education Research Complete, ProQuest and VOCED) were searched in order to synthesize the evidence around delivery of oncofertility care. Related citations and reference lists were searched. The review was undertaken following registration (International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) registration number CRD42017055837) and guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). OUTCOMES: A total of 846 potentially relevant studies were identified after the removal of duplicates. All titles and abstracts were screened by a single reviewer and the final 147 papers were screened by two reviewers. Ten papers on established MOC were identified amongst the included papers. Data were extracted from each paper and quality scores were then summarized in the oncofertility MOC summary matrix. The results identified a number of themes for improving MOC in each domain, which included: the importance of patients receiving communication that is of a higher quality and in different formats on their fertility risk and FP options; improving provision of oncofertility care in a timely manner; improving access to age-appropriate care; defining the role and scope of practice of all HCPs; and improving communication between different HCPs. Different forms of decision aids were found useful for assisting patients to understand FP options and weigh up choices. WIDER IMPLICATIONS: This analysis identifies core components for delivery of oncofertility MOC. The provision of oncofertility services requires planning to ensure services have safe and reliable referral pathways and that they are age-appropriate and include medical and psychological oncofertility care into the survivorship period. In order for this to happen, collaboration needs to occur between clinicians, allied HCPs and executives within paediatric and adult hospitals, as well as fertility clinics across both public and private services. Training of both cancer and non-cancer HCPs is needed to improve the knowledge of HCPs, the quality of care provided and the confidence of HCPs with these consultations

Evaluating the role of visual attention bias in emotion dysregulation of young children

Background: This study aims to determine whether visual attention bias is associated with the level of emotion dysregulation (ED) in children and which individual attributes may modify their relationship. Methods: A community-based sample of 50 children aged 3-8 years old was recruited. The level of ED in children was measured using the parental report measures: Child Behaviour Checklist and Temper Tantrum Scale. Visual attention bias measured as eye gaze fixation time in response to images showing various emotional expressions was measured using an eye-tracking task. Generalized linear models were used to evaluate whether visual attention bias was associated with ED when social function (measured with the Social Responsiveness Scale, gender, age, and attention problem (measured from the CBCL subscale), were adjusted. The modifying effect on visual attention bias was evaluated using the interaction analysis in the generalized linear model. Results: The level of visual attention bias, indicated by the proportion of eye gaze fixation time on areas of interest (AOIs) in images displaying unpleasant emotions (such as anger), was inversely associated with the level of externalising problem behaviours (p = .014). Additionally, the association of eye gaze fixation time for AOI displaying negative emotional cues with the level of externalising problem behaviours varied by age (p = .04), with younger children (aged <70 months) demonstrating a stronger association than older children (aged ≥ 70 months). Conclusions: There is a significant inverse correlation between visual attention bias towards unpleasant emotional cues and ED in younger children. However, this relationship is attenuated as children age. While further research is needed, these results have implications for the development of objective biomarkers incorporating eye-tracking tasks for prediction and targeted support for ED-related mental health issues in the early years

How can we improve oncofertility care for patients? A systematic scoping review of current international practice and models of care

BACKGROUND Fertility preservation (FP) is an important quality of life issue for cancer survivors of reproductive age. Despite the existence of broad international guidelines, the delivery of oncofertility care, particularly amongst paediatric, adolescent and young adult patients, remains a challenge for healthcare professionals (HCPs). The quality of oncofertility care is variable and the uptake and utilization of FP remains low. Available guidelines fall short in providing adequate detail on how oncofertility models of care (MOC) allow for the real-world application of guidelines by HCPs. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature on the components of oncofertility care as defined by patient and clinician representatives, and identify the barriers, facilitators and challenges, so as to improve the implementation of oncofertility services. SEARCH METHODS A systematic scoping review was conducted on oncofertility MOC literature published in English between 2007 and 2016, relating to 10 domains of care identified through consumer research: communication, oncofertility decision aids, age-appropriate care, referral pathways, documentation, training, supportive care during treatment, reproductive care after cancer treatment, psychosocial support and ethical practice of oncofertility care. A wide range of electronic databases (CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, AEIPT, Education Research Complete, ProQuest and VOCED) were searched in order to synthesize the evidence around delivery of oncofertility care. Related citations and reference lists were searched. The review was undertaken following registration (International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) registration number CRD42017055837) and guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). OUTCOMES A total of 846 potentially relevant studies were identified after the removal of duplicates. All titles and abstracts were screened by a single reviewer and the final 147 papers were screened by two reviewers. Ten papers on established MOC were identified amongst the included papers. Data were extracted from each paper and quality scores were then summarized in the oncofertility MOC summary matrix. The results identified a number of themes for improving MOC in each domain, which included: the importance of patients receiving communication that is of a higher quality and in different formats on their fertility risk and FP options; improving provision of oncofertility care in a timely manner; improving access to age-appropriate care; defining the role and scope of practice of all HCPs; and improving communication between different HCPs. Different forms of decision aids were found useful for assisting patients to understand FP options and weigh up choices. WIDER IMPLICATIONS This analysis identifies core components for delivery of oncofertility MOC. The provision of oncofertility services requires planning to ensure services have safe and reliable referral pathways and that they are age-appropriate and include medical and psychological oncofertility care into the survivorship period. In order for this to happen, collaboration needs to occur between clinicians, allied HCPs and executives within paediatric and adult hospitals, as well as fertility clinics across both public and private services. Training of both cancer and non-cancer HCPs is needed to improve the knowledge of HCPs, the quality of care provided and the confidence of HCPs with these consultations